VAR 04.76/" .oma. /� �,< -�, Zwlz
City of Fr'idley
AT THE TOP OF THE TWINS
;,�,
e • _____ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIV.
r 1 PROTECTIVE INSPECTION SEC.
e01 "'0 CITY HALL FRIDLEY 55432
61?. -5611-3450
I O TO BOAR OF APPEALS
APPLICATION
NU#A BER
910-F23
REV.
1
tDATE
3/21/75
PAGE OF
1 2
APPROVED 'BY '
400
Name
ess Phone
Legal
Description
Lot No.
Block No.
Tract
or Addn.
Variance Request(s); including stated hardships (attach plat or survey of property
showing building, variances, etc., wheke applicable) r0_4 l®' ro
rb -A
�Q_ LJ, 4.JL,-X Z11 C
R
.�'d/W�
V
PO t.'
rL•
r�
Dat
L
Meeting Date
c2l —9
Fee
Rec ipt No.
Signature
Comments & Recommendations by
the Board of Appeals.
City Council Action and Date
L�
C;i•ty of j I•i( icy
AT THE TOP OF THE TWINS
J,
�4 _-____� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIV.
1 L PROTECTIVE INSPECTION SEC.
r I
r ---ti CITY HALL FRIDLEY 55432
612.560-3450
!,UBJtcr
APPLICATIOfJ TO BOARD OF APPEALS
(Staff Report)
NUMBER
910•-F23
REV.
1
DATE
3/21/:5
I'AGE OF
2 2
APPROVED BY
800
Staff Comments
Board members notified of meeting by q-� i-`1% List members,
date notified, and "Yes" or "No" for plans to attend hearing. Plan
Date To Attend
Name
J✓i l-
g5
Pearson making appeal and the following property owners having property within 200
feet notified: By Whom
Name Date Phone or Mail Notified
q -1 t6 -17(o Q� 10h b,
64.30 76ee.
/} terCe �J 6a®O ALI. iFee.
IC�t 1,Z(30 Zu. --I-cez
b 6a('
[� 6 4 oU,,�_ LQlI i
o ! (cam to a tr, (U . /� r2 le
,:
V.
• 9 Q
1911-63AcQ 6UJ4_.-
•(oaQ1 9u: i,�eee,
OFFICIAL NOTICE
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE
APPEALS COMMISSION
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Appeals Commission of the City of Fridley
will meet in the Council Chamber of the City Hall at 7:30 P.M. on Tuesday, April 27,
1976 to consider the following matter:
A request for a variance of Section 205.053, 4B,
Fridley City Code, to reduce the side yard setback
from the required 10 feet to 6 feet, to allow the
construction of a house and garage to be located
on Lot 1, Block 3, Al Rose Addition, the same being
6270 Riverview Terrace N.E., Fridley, Minnesota.
(Request by Mr. A. C. Mattson, 189 River Edge Way
N.E., Fridley, Minnesota 55432.)
Anyone who desires to be heard with reference to the above matter will be
heard at this meeting.
VIRGINIA WAHLBERG
CHAIRWOMAN
APPEALS COMMISSION
OFFICIAL NOTICE
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE
APPEALS COMMISSION
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Appeals Commission of the City of Fridley
will meet in the Council Chamber of the City Hall at 7:30 P.M. on Tuesday, April 27,
1976 to consider the following matter:
A request for a variance of Section 205.053, 4B,
Fridley City Code, to reduce the side yard setback
from the required 10 feet to 6 feet, to allow the
construction of a house and garage to be located
on Lot 1, Block 3, Al Rose .Addition, the same being
6270 Riverview Terrace N.E., Fridley, Minnesota.
(Request by Mr. A. C. Mattson, 189 River Edge Way
N.E., Fridley, Minnesota 55432.)
Anyone who desires to be heard with reference to the above matter will be
heard at this meeting.
VIRGINIA WAHLBERG
CHAIRWOMAN
APPEALS COMMISSION
Ljohd Planning �°� (�� �� � ` 6@75 Highway No. 65 N.E.
Minneapolis,
Land Surveying e o (
Saila Teseing ` ® Minn. 55432
Civil Engineering
Telephone 784-6066
Municipal tngineering Engineers & Surveyors Area Code 612
Certificate of Survey for
7j
xqr
-231
;
y7
"
)
d t
vrooQ@ an L+ill�� �a;e�nant ° lnoteq ,ran monamkn,
LOT I R04 3
AL 909E ADDITION
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct. representation of a survey of the boundaries of the above
d—cribed land, and of the location of all buildings, thereon, anti all visible encroachments, if any, from or on
° said land. As surveyed by me this _day of 1421 .
SUBURBAN ENGINEERING, INC.
Engineer yyf Sur oyars
tut .t.,
ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT
6270 Riverview Terrace
A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT: Section 205.053, 4B, side yard
setback of 10 feet
Public purpose served by this section is to maintain a minimum of 20 feet
between living areas in adjoining structures and 15 feet between garages
and living areas in adjoining structures to; 1. Reduce exposure to
conflagration of fire between structures and, 2. To allow for open areas
around residential structures to maintain aesthetically pleasing surroundings.
B. STATED HARDSHIP: Lot is not wide enough for proposed house plan.
C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: The survey submitted with the proposed house
drawn to scale on it shows only 6 feet of clearance to the north lot line
and 5 feet of clearance to the south lot line. The 5 foot setback to the
garage is within City Code. The distance from the proposed house to the
existing garage on adjoining property would be approximately 16 feet.
Due to the fact that there is adequate lot width and depth, the staff
feels that a..house could be designed to fit the side yard setbacks of the
City Code.
NOTE: The Appeals Commission will have the final action on this request,
unless there are objections from surrounding neighbors, the City
staff, or the petitioner does not agree with the Board's decision.
If any of these events occur, the request will continue to the City
Council through the Planning Commission with only a recommendation
from the Appeals Commission.
Submitted by;
Ron Holden
Building Inspection Officer
April 27, 1976
FRIDLEY APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING
APRIL 27, 1976
MEMBERS PRESENT: Virginia Wahlberg, Alex Barna, Pat Gabel
MEMBERS ABSENT: Dick Kemper, Jim Plemel
OTHERS PRESENT: Ron Holden, Building Inspection Officer
The meeting was called to order by Chairwoman Wahlberg at 7:35 p.m.
MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mrs. Gabel, to,approve the minutes of the
April 13, 1976 meeting as written. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the
motion carried unanimously.
RECEIVE GUIDELINES ON 40 FOOT LOTS FROM CITY COUNCIL:
Chairwoman Wahlberg stated that in addition to the minutes of the subcommissions
on the 40 foot lots which were distributed at the last Appeals meeting, there
is now available a list of tentative guidelines from the Planning Commission
on substandard lots. She explained that the Planning Commission has passed
these guidelines on to the City Council for their review, and at this point
the Council has not yet come up with an affirmative plan.
Mr..Holden said that this was discussed at the City Council meeting last night,.
.and they concluded the Planning Commission guidelines were good points to
consider. He added that the Council suggested they should be considered on
an individual basis, with review and final approval to be by the Council. Chair-
woman Wahlberg said that all the subcommittees felt the city should go along
with building on 40' lots, but there were stipulations they felt should be
adhered to.
TENTATIVE GUIDELINES FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON SUBSTANDARD LOTS:
1. The Planning Commission feels that it was consistent with the
Comprehensive Housing Plan that sub -standard lots should be
developed in Fridley, but each sub -standard lot should be con-
sidered separately.
2. That there be no variance allowed from the present ordinance
allowing a maximum of 25% lot coverage. (For example, on a
5200 square foot lot, which would require a variance for lot
size, only 1000 square feet of the lot could be covered by
the house and garage.)
3. If there is land available on either side of a sub -standard lot,
every effort should be made to purchase that lot at a fair
market price by the petitioner, so the lot size -would be consistent
R
FRIDLEY APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 279 1976 - PAGE 2
with the existing building sites in the area. If the petitioner
refuses to try and negotiate for additional vacant land, consideration
should be given to denying the variance. All denials have to be
based on good, sound considerations.
4. That the owner/builder make as much of an effort as possible to
meet the existing codes.
5. That the house being built on a sub -standard lot blend in as
aesthetically as possible with the existing houses in the neighborhood,
realizing that a new home cannot always blend into an old neighborhood.
STAFF'S COMMENTS:
a. Statement of hardship must include statement regarding length
of ownership which would give indication if property was owned
for a nu,nber of years, or recently acquired with the intention
of speculating on development of a 40 foot lot.
b. All variances associated with the development of 40 foot lots
would require final approval by the City Council.
MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mrs. Gabel, to accept the tentative guidelines
from the Planning Commission on substandard lots. Upon*a voice vote, all voting
aye, the motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Barna suggested that a 5200 square foot lot with a decent size house shouldn't
require a garage, but Chairwoman Wahlberg.stated it wasn't this Commission's
prerogatitre to change that stipulation. She said that -would have to go through
the Planning Commission.
Mr. Holden said he wanted to bring up that the City Council discussed and
endorsed the idea that the Appeals Commission try .to substantiate with facts
any findings on the forty foot lots.
Chairwoman Wahlberg stated that she was slightly disappointed that the guidelines
weren't stronger. She said that most of the subcommissions seem to.be pretty
consistent on their feelings on this, and she hoped they could act in the best
interest of the city in the future.
1. A REQUEST FOR VARIANCES OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 205.053, 1B, TO REDUCE THE LOT AREA REQUIRED, FOR A LOT RECORDED
BEFORE DECEMBER 29, 1955, FROM 7500 SQUARE FEET TO 5218 SQUARE FEET, AND,
SECTION 205.0530 2B, TO REDUCE THE LOT WIDTH REQUIRED, FOR A LOT RECORDED
BEFORE DECEMBER 29, 1955, FROM 50 FEET TO 40 FEET, AND
SECTION 205.053, 3, TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM IAT COVERAGE BY THE MAIN
BUILDING AND ALL ACCESSORY BUILDINGS FROM 25 PERCENT TO 27.8 PERCENT, AND,
SECTION 205.053, 4B, TO REDUCE THE SIDE YARD ADJOINING LIVING AREA FROM
THE REQUIRED 10 FEET To 5 FEET, AND
3
i
FRiDLEY APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 27, 1976 - PAGE 3
SECTION 205.0531 4B, 5b, TO REDUCE THE SETBACK FOR AN ATTACHED GARAGE WHICH
OPENS ONTO THE SIDE STREET OF A CORNER IAT, FROM THE REQUIRED 25 FEET TO
13 FEET, AND
SECTION 205.053, 4B, 5a, To REDUCE THE SIDE.YARD SETBACK FROM THE SIDE STREET
OF A CORNER LOT FROM 17.5 FEET TO 11 FEET,
ALL TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A HOUSE AND ATTACHED GARAGE TO BE LOCATED
ON LOT 15, BLOCK 3, PLYMOUTH ADDITION, THE SAME BEING 11800 - 2� STREET N.E.,
FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA. (REQUEST BY MR. DENIS L. VILLELLA, 7651 CENTRAL AVENUE
N.E., FRIDLEY, MN. 5532)
MOTION by Mrs. Gabel, seconded by Mr. Barna, to remove this item from the table.
Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
MOTION by Mrs. Gabel, seconded by Mr. Barna, to open the public hearing. Upon
a.voice.vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Villella was at the meeting to present his request, and a neighboring land
owner, Mr. C. L. Popp of 4762 212 Street N.E., Fridley, was also present. Mr.
Villella showed to the Commission photographs of the lot and a house plan.
Chairwoman Wahlberg reviewed the request item by item, and Mr. Villella said
that number 5, to reduce the setback for an attached garage, was no longer a
request. Chairwoman Wahlberg said it still fell short of minimum lot size,
and in addition to the eleven foot setback from the lot line there was a twelve
foot boulevard easement which the city owned.
Mr. Popp asked Mr. Villella if he was still over the 25% lot coverage, and Mr.
Villella replied he could cut the house down to 960 feet, for a total of 1400
square feet including the garage.
Chairwoman Wahlberg told.Mr. Villella the maximum he would be allowed was
1303.square feet, and suggested an alternative of building a single -car garage
instead of a double garage. Mr. Barna suggested using a different house design;
either a two story or a story and a half.
Chairwoman Wahlberg reviewed the guideline which states there be no variance
allowed from the present ordinance of 25% lot coverage. She said this appeared
to be very consisent among three subcommissions, the Planning Commission and
the City.,Council. She told Mr. Villella that unless he could come up with an
alternate plan which would reduce the coverage, the Commission would not be
allowed to approve it. She explained that with fewer lots in the city to build
on, there will be people wanting to build on these 1101 lots, and there was no
objection to building on these lots if they meet existing building codes. Mrs.
Wahlberg said this would provide scattered mixed housing throughout the city,
which fits in with the Comprehensive Housing Plan to encourage lower-cost housing.
Mr. Popp stated he did not want this to be allowed. He felt it would not blend
in with the neighborhood, and also was concerned that a house that close to the
street might be a safety hazard. He also felt his view might be impaired.
FRIDLEY APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 27, 1976 - PAGE 4
Mr. Villella said that he could make the house 960 square -feet with a one -car
garage, and there should be no problem. Chairwoman Wahlberg said it was her
understanding that the adjacent land owner had no objection to building on this
property, and Mr. Villella said that was correct. He said he had a new house
plan in mind that would be 241 X 40' with a single -car garage, and would be
either a front split or side split.
Chairwoman Wahlberg pointed out that he would still require the two side yard
setback variances and the 40' lot variance. She said that if he was willing to
change the garage entrance from the side street to curve around, that variance
could be eliminated.
Mr. Barna asked Mr. Popp if he would have any objections if the house was
smaller and he could be assured it wouldn't obstruct his view, and Mr. Popp
replied he wouldn't if Mr. Villella would change the plans.
Chairwoman Wahlberg asked Mr. Holden if he thought the Board should approve
the house plan, and he replied that he would recommend that the house plan
be submitted to the City Council.
MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mrs. Gabel, to close the public hearing.
Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
Mrs. Gabel said she didn't think she could object to this since Mr. Villella
was willing to work within the guidelines, and this plan fit into the Compre-
hensive Housing Plan. She also felt it would bring up the value of existing homes.
Chairwoman Wahlberg said that in addition to his willingness to work with the
25% coverages another point to be made is that there is really no land available
to add to this lot to bring it up to code.
MOTION by Mrs. Gabel, seconded by Mr. Barna, to approve the requests for
variances 11 2, 4 and 6, and deny the requests for variances 3 and 51 noting
that the developer has agreed to this. Upon a voice votes all voting aye,
the motion carried unanimously.
Chairwoman Wahlberg thanked Mr. Villella for his patience with the city in
determining this, and said she would make an effort to help him get on the
City Council agenda for next Monday.
Mr. Holden told Mr. Villella that the city wanted to inform him that it may be
necessary that this'40' lot and others be charged an additional sewer and water
assessment, as these lots were not assessed as buildable sites.
2. A REQUEST FORA VARIANCE OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE AS FOLLOWS;
SECTION 205.053, 4A, TO REDUCE THE FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM THE REQUIRED
35 FEET -TO 25 FEET, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A HOUSE AND GARAGE TO BE
LOCATED ON LOT 39 BLOCK 1, HEATHER HILLS 2ND ADDITION' THE SAME BEING 1411
KERRY CIRCLE N.E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA. (REQUEST BY MR. MIKE O'BANNON, 5298 FILLMORE
STREET N.E., FRIDLEY$ MINNESOTA 55421.)
FRIDLEY APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 27s 1976 - PAGE 5
MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mrs. Gabel, to open the public hearing. Upon
a voice votes all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
Mr. O'Bannon stepped forward to present his proposal.
ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT
A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT: Section 205.053.9 4A. front yard
setback of 35 feet.
Public purpose served by this section is to allow for off-street parking
without encroaching on the public right of way. Also the aesthetic
consideration -of the neighborhood to reduce the "building line of sight"
encroachment into the neighbor's front yard.
B. STATED HARDSHIP: Because the house is on the first lot of the cul-de-sac
it will be located behind the house on Lot #2 to the east.
C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: The actual curbing in this particular
cul-de-sac right of way was shifted to the north in order to allow for
a buildable site on Lot 6'across the street. Staff feels that if the
petitioner is able to maintain approximately the same distance between
the curbing and the house setback that they would have no objection to
the variance. Staff recommends that in as much as the lot to the east
is undeveloped, a house could be placed on the neighboring lot which
would not restrict the view of the petitioner.
MOTION by Mr. Barnas seconded by Mrs. Gabel, to accept the Administrative
Report. Upon a voice vote' all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
Mr. O'Bannon stated that he was the developer of the Kerry Circle areas
and showed the Board a photograph of the lot and a map of.the lots on the
cul-de-sac. He said he was asking to move the house up so it would be a
little more in line with the other houses and still put two cars in the
driveway.
Mr. Barna said he was out to the area today and felt there was approximately
25 feet from the curb to garage. Mr. O'Bannon said he thought it was more
like 35 - 40 feet.
Chairwoman Wahlberg asked if the land sloped away in the back, and Mr. O'Bannon
replied it did not, only about three feet at the most. She asked if the basic
reason for moving the house forward was continuity with the rest of the houses,
and Mr. O'Bannon said it was.
MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mrs. Gabel, to close the public hearing
Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
Chairwoman Wahlberg asked Mr. Holden if a normal 35 foot setback would restrict
the neighbor's view. Mr. Holden replied it would be possible for them to set
a house back far enough. He stated that in respect to Lot #6 which had been
moved in closers staff felt it could be kept the same distance (house to curb)
FRIDLEY APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 27, 1976 a PAGE 6
and felt there really wouldn't be much of a problem in maintaining a site line
for both the houses. He said it:would be possible to build the house at 351,
but the back yard would be upset. He added that he thought the request for
variance was reasonable.
Chairwoman Wahlberg asked if when the staff discussed the existing Lot #6
the street circle was the circumference that was originally planned, and Mr.
Holden replied that assuming the survey of the house to be correct, either
the street had not shifted as far north as was expected or the radius has
changed. Chairwoman Wahlberg said that because of the shape of the lot and
the aesthetics involved, she felt it would need a variance of some sort.
MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mrs. Gabel., to grant the variance as stated.
Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
3. A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 205.0539 4B, TO REDUCE THE SIDE YARD.SETBACK FROM THE REQUIRED 10
FEET TO 6 FEET, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A HOUSE AND GARAGE TO BE LOCATED
ON LOT 11 BLACK 31 AL ROSE ADDITION, THE SAME BEING 6270 RIVERVIEW TERRACE N.E.,
FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA. (REQUEST BY MR. A. C. MATTSON, 189 RIVER EDGE WAY N.E.,
FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55432
MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mrs. Gabel, to open the public hearing. Upon
a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Mattson approached the Board, along with Mr. and Mrs. LeRoy Winner, owners
of the lot to the south.
ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT
A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT: Section 205.053, 4B, side yard
setback of 10 feet.
Public purpose served by this section is to maintain a minimum of 20 feet
between living areas in adjoining structures and 15 feet between garages
and living areas in adjoining structures to; 1. Reduce exposure to
conflagration of fire between structures and, 2. To allow for open areas
around residential structures to maintain aesthetically pleasing surroundings.
B. STATE HARDSHIP: Lot is not wide enough for proposed house plan.
C ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: The survey submitted with the proposed house
drawn to scale on it shows only 6 feet of clearance to the north lot line
and 5 feet of clearance to the south lot line. The 5 foot setback to the
garage is within City Code. The distance from the proposed house to the
existing garage on adjoining property would be approximately 16 feet.
Due to the fact that there is adequate lot width and depth, the staff
feels that a house could be designed to fit the side yard setbacks of the
City Code.
MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mrs. Gabel, to receive the Administrative
Staff Report. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
h
FRIDLEY APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 27, 1976 - PAGE 7
Mr. Mattson showed the Commission photographs of the lot, his proposed house
plan and the survey of the lot. He explained when he bought the property he
was told it was 89 feet wide, and learned later that it was 79 feet wide. He
said the house he wanted to build was too big for the lot, so he cut down the
size of the garage. He stated he would still have the same distance between
the .two homes that is normally between houses, but he still needs a 4 foot
variance on one.side. He added that he had already sold his home at 189 River
Edge Way and had to move into a one -bedroom apartment until his new home was
ready. •
Mrs. Winner stated her concern that light would be cut off from her kitchen
window when Mr. Mattson's garage was built. Air. Mattson explained that his
garage would be 5' in front of their garage, so it wouldn't affect them at
all; however, looking out to the street they would see the back of the garage.
He explained there would be a storage space under his garage since diminishing
the size of the garage had eliminated room for storage. They had no further objections.
Mr. Mattson said he had discovered the lot size when he applied for the permit,
and didn't want to change the house size as he didn't know where to cut off
4 feet. Chairwoman Wahlberg suggested a different house plan, but Mr. Mattson
explained the reason they sold their house and bought this property was because
they really wanted this plan. He said they had already invested $20,000 in the
lot,'and a lot of time and effort had gone into designing this house. He stated
if he couldn't get the variance he would consider putting a garage on each side
of the house.
Chairwoman Wahlberg said that the lot was buildable and any house could be built
on it that meets code, and this plan didn't. She said the Commission did not
necessarily make a habit of approving variances without the petitioner considering
any alternatives. Mr. Barna added that two side yard -setbacks are required; on'
one side may be a garage and the other side must be living space, so Mr. Mattson
wouldn't be able to build a garage on both sides. He suggested to Mr. Mattson
that he either cut down the garage or consider another house plan.
Chairwoman Wahlberg stated that the basic idea was to allow 20 feet between living
areas in adjoining structures and 15 feet between garages and living areas in
adjoining structures because of fire hazards. She added that her main concern
was the fact that a 79' lot is buildable without variances, and there are floor
Plans that would fit. Mr. Mattson answered that his -home would be no closer
than those in the rest of Fridley and wouldn't be a fire hazard because he still
had.the 16 feet, and he added that his neighbors didn't object.
MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mrs. Gabel, to close the public hearing. Upon
a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
Chairwoman Wahlberg stated the Staff Report suggests that perhaps an alternate
building plan could be drawn which would meet the City Code, however' the petitioner
stated he feels he has had this plan for some time and was unaware the lot was
actually 10 feet smaller that what he originally thought it to be, and he feels
he has a considerable amount of money invested in the lot and the plan and would
like to build as proposed.
FRIDLEY APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 27, 1976 - PAGE 8
Mrs. Gabel said she had two feelings on the matter: 1) She didntt like it because
the lot is definitely buildable and there are plans that would fit on this lot,
and 2) She stated if she had $20,000 invested in it, had the plan for some time,
and originally believed the lot was larger, she would want the right to build, too.
Mr. Mattson suggested he build a one -car garage, but Chairwoman Wahlberg said
she didn't feel that would be the solution as with that price -range house there
should be a double garage.
Chairwoman Wahlberg asked Mr. Holden if the staff was aware of the amount of
time the plans had been considered or that the original owner misrepresented
the size of the lot when they wrote the Administrative Report. Mr. Holden
replied that the misrepresented size had been considered, but not the amount
of time and money that had already been invested in it.
MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mrs. Gabel, to grant the variance, taking into
consideration the placement of the garage.
Chairwoman Wahlberg stated that from a philosophical standpoint they had a problem
before the Board which was difficult to solve, and she appreciated the petitioner's
particular problems in discovering the lot was less than he anticipated it was.
However., she said, this has come up in the past and the -Commission has encouraged
petitioners to go back to the drawing board and try to meet the code, because
it has been written as a protection for all citizens. She added that since the
lot would be buildable with any other plan, it is unfortunate the petitioner
does not feel he could change his plans.
Upon a voice vote, Mrs. Gabel.and Mr. Barna voting aye, Chairwoman Wahlberg
voting nay, the motion carried 2 - 1.
Mrs. Wahlberg informed Mr. Mattson that this would now go before the City Council
for review on May 17th.
4. A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE OF THE FRIDLEY SIGN ORDINANCE AS FOLLOWS
SECTION 214.053, 7, TO REDUCE THE SETBACK FOR A SIGN FROM A PROPERTY LINE,
FROM THE REQUIRED 10 FEET TO 7 FEET, TO ALLOW THE ERECTION OF A FREE STANDING
SIGN TO BE LOCATED ON LOTS 2 AND 3, BLOCK 1, LAMPERTS ADDITION, THE SAME BEING
lobo OSBORNE ROAD N..E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA. (REQUEST BY FRIDLEY V.F.W. POST
#363, lOhO OSBORNED ROAD N.E., FRIDLEY, MN. 55.32.)
MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mrs. Gabel, to open the public hearing. Upon
a.voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Dick Mechinski approached the Board as a representative of the V.F.W.
ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT
A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENT: Section 211.0539 7, "No part of a
sign shall be within ten (10) feet of any property line".
B. STATED HARDSHIP: By pushing sign back the 10 feet, it would limit parking
needed. The existing structure setback limits available room for driveway
area width. and parking stalls which are required for the building.
FRIDLEY APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL -27J 1976 - PAGE 9
C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: Staff measurements show the building to be
setback 53 feet from the front lot'line and 40 feet from a proposed
landscape island. This 40 foot area is needed to supply adequate parking
for the building. If the sign is moved back to the 10 foot setback point,
a total of.possibly 4 parking stalls would have to be eliminated to
maintain adequate driving width between the sign and the parking stalls.
Building the sign with the seven (7) foot setback leaves only 2 feet from
the brick sign base to the curbing in the parking area.
Staff feels that the sign should not be moved back closer to the curb.
than the two feet, as this creates a driving hazard. In as much as there
are not any similar signs in the area and the sign will be setback
approximately 18 feet from the street side curb, staff has no objection
to this variance being granted.
MOTION by Mrs. Gabel, seconded by Mr. Barna, to receive the Administrative
Staff Report. Upon a voice vote.,,all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Mochinski stated he wished to erect a brick wall with aluminum letters
saying "V.F.W. POST 363", which would. be illuminated during certain hours.
Chairwoman Wahlberg informed the Board that this was part of the up -grading
that came through some time ago. She said that in addition to this sign, on
the front of the building there is the V.F.W. sign also. She asked Mr. Mochinski
if he felt the sign would be prone to damage, especially since there was_a
school nearby, and he said that was why they chose cast -aluminum letters.
Mrs. Gabel .said she wondered if this advertising was necessary,
and Mr. Mochinski
said the V.F.W. wanted to identify Post 363. He said they had a choice of several
things, but felt the brick wall would help clean up the area. He stated he was
trying to keep both the V.F.W. and the city happy, and showed the Commission
where the green areas would be on the diagram.
Mr. Barna questioned what would be done with the snow that is piled up in
back, and Mr. Mochinski said the V.F.W. would pay for snow removal to haul it
out.
MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mrs. Gabel, to close -the public hearing. Upon
a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
Mrs. Gabel said she was glad they were cleaning up the area, and since this
appeared to be a pleasing sign and conforms to code, she wouldn't have any
objection.
MOTION.by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mrs. Gabel, to grant the variance. Upon a
voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
Chairwoman Wahlberg informed Mr,. Mochinski that this would now go before the
City Council on May 17th.
5. A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 205.052, 4B, TO REDUCE THE SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM THE REQUIRED 10 FEET
TO APPROXIMATELY 8 FEET (NO SURVEY AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME) TO ALLOW THE ADDITION
FRIDLEY APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 27, 1976 - PAGE 10
OF A SECOND STORY ONTO AN EXISTING NON -CONFORMING STRUCTURE LOCATED ON LOT 5
AND 6, BLOCK 18, FRIDLEY PARK ADDITION, THE SAME BEING 40 - 621 WAY N.E.,
FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA. (REQUEST BY MR. RAYMOND K. HUMANN, 4o - 621.8 WAY N.E.,
FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55432.)
MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded.by Mrs. Gabel, to open the public hearing. Upon
a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Humann approached the Board to present his request, and showed them
photographs of the house and lot and a survey. of the lot.
ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT
A. PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVED BY REQUIREMENTS: Section 205.053, 4B, side yard
setback of ten (10) feet. Public.purpose served by this section is to
maintain a minimum of 20 feet between living areas of adjoining structures
and 15 feet between garage and living areas of adjoining structures to;
1. Reduce exposure to conflagration of fire between structures and, 2.
To allow for open areas around residentail structures to maintain aesthetically
pleasing surroundings.
B. STATED HARDSHIP: Family of 5 needs more room (bedrooms).
C. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REVIEW: Staff measurements show 22 feet between the
house and the neighbors garage to the east. The house appears to -be 8
feet from the fence which is assumed as lot line (survey not available at
this time). In that the neighbor to the east has no objection, staff would
recommend granting the variance.
Mr. Barna said he questioned why this was a non -conforming structure, and Mr.
Humann explained because the lot line on one side was 8 feet. Mr. Humann stated
he would have to remove the whole roof section to do what he wanted to, and would
have the dormer section towards the front of the house. He said he would only
be expanding up, not out, and had no intention of putting an overhang on the
house. He added that he•now had two bedrooms with three boys, and one was sleeping
in the basement. The upstairs would contain two bedrooms; a 12 X 12' for two
of the boys, and a 10 X 18' for the master bedroom. He explained that it would
look like a two-story house from the front, and would look the same in the rear.
Chairwoman Wahlberg noted that Bernetta Jensen of 30 - 60g Way, N.E. had signed
an agreement of approval.
MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mrs. Gabel, to close the public hearing. Upon
a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Barna stated that there seemed to be enough room between the two houses,
and he felt the only problem was the unknown lot line, but he had no objections.
Chairwoman Wahlberg said that the new survey seemed to confirm the lot line,
going by the fence.
MOTION by Mrs. Gabel, seconded by Mr. Barna, to approve the variance request,
with the understanding that the existing structure be included in the variance.
Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously.
FRIDLEY-APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 279 1976 - PAGE 11
ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Chairwoman Wahlberg informed the members that the Community.Development Commission
was going to set up a Sign Ordinance Project Committee, and when the concept
first came before the Commission she suggested that a member of the Appeals
Commission should perhaps serve on that committee because of the fact that
the Board of Appeals has gone through a lot of the sign ordinances in the past
year or so. She explained what they intended to do was have several citizens
serve on the committee along with members from the business community, Chamber
of Commerce, League of Women Voters, people from the sign companies, etc., to
try to get feelings from various perspectives as to what our sign ordinances
should be.
Mrs. Gabel volunteered to serve on that committee, and Chairwoman Wahlberg
said she would submit her name.
Chairwoman Wahlberg told the Commission that the Youth Project Committee had
been heard from again. She said this item had been tabled, but the Committee
had gone back and reworked their proposal and went before the Human Resources
Commission with their final Teen Center Proposal. Mrs. Wahlberg read aloud
the following proposal of the Youth Project Committee:
WHEREAS, over 43% of Fridley's population is under 18, and
WHEREAS, Fridley does not have a center for its youth, and
WHEREAS, our survey shows that most of Fridley's youths want a teen center,
We the members of the Fridley Youth Project Committee recommend that a
temporary youth center be established in the Fridley Civic Center. We
prefer that it be located in the room presently occupied by the Parks and
Recreation Department. However, if this is not feasible, our second choice
is the room that was formerly occupied by the library.
This.youth center should have a temporary board of directors consisting
of six regular members and two ex -officio members. Regular members shall
be appointed by the following groups: one by the Fridley City Council;
one by the Fridley Planning Commission; one by the Fridley Human Resources
Commission; and two by the Fridley Youth Project Committee. One ex -officio
member shall be appointed by the Fridley City Council and one by the Fridley
Police Department.
The temporary board of directors should serve for not more than 30 days
during which time they will write the charter, establish the interim rules
for the youth center and facilitate the election for regular members to
the permanent board. The appointed ex -officio members will also serve on the
permanent board.
Administratively, the youth center will be under the auspices of the Parks
and Recreation Department who will assign staff to supervise and carry out
the guidelines established by the board of directors.
Chairwoman Wahlberg said the Human Resources Commission approved the resolution
and asked the City through the Planning Commission to bring the Youth Center
under the auspices of the Parks and Recreation Department.
FRIDLEY APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 27, 1976 - PAGE 12
Chairwoman Wahlberg said that another item that came up at the end of the
Planning Commission meeting was the Goals and Objectives of the Parks and
Recreation Department, which is being called Human Development. She stated
there were five goal areas that the city would consider, and most of them
were approved in concept but it was felt some of them could be incorporated
together.
Mr. Barna stated he would like to discuss the code requiring garages for new
structures. He said he felt the energies required to build the garage and heat
it were going against the environmental standards. He suggested a carport could
serve the purpose as well.
Mrs. Gabel said it would be nice for the homes to have more living space, but
she felt there would come a time when the owner would request a variance to build
a garage since he might have two cars, a need f•)r storage space, etc.
Chairwoman Wahlberg said she did not agree with Mr. Barna's statement because
she didn't think most garages were heated, and she said the argument from an
environmental standpoint didn't hold because the additional part of the home
would need just as much resource and energy. She added that she thought visual
pollution would be created by carports because the storage space would be exposed..
Chairwoman Wahlberg brought to the Board's attention page 205-10, numbers 3) and
4) at the top of the page in the City of Fridley's Zoning Ordinance, and asked
Mr. Holden if he could have someone clarify the difference between a single family
dwelling unit of a split level design and a two story dwelling unit of split
entry design for the next meeting. Mr. Holden suggested if there were three
entries; split level, split entry and split foyer, it would be easier to categorize.
Chairwoman Wahlberg said she had heard that some time in the future all the zoning
ordinances would be reviewed and updated, and possibly rewriten.
ADJOURNMENT:
Chairwoman Wahlberg adjourned the meeting of the Appeals Commission at 10:46 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Sherri.O'Donnell
Recording Secretary
I �
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 17, 1976 PAGE 7
Also, whether the City will or would want to have the names of those persons from the
organizations, or other qualified persons, who work the names submitted to the Council
so that the administration would know who are the people that are authorized to work
at these games. This might be another area that could be relevant.
Mayor Nee inquired if there is a general consensus that we could adopt it with a zero
in the licensing fee? The City Attorney said yes, and in the skeleton ordinance that
he drew up .he put in one section which indicated it would be used for additional
regulations over and above what the statutes require if the majority of the Council
feels they want to have additional regulations; that has a blank number also.
The City Attorney went on to say that he imagines that the City would further restrict
the number of games that could be held below the 104 finure. He assumes from the way
the statute is written that the City would further restrict the amount of money that
can be given out on any game or both, and could also restrict the hours.
The City Attorney said that as he reads the statutes the legislature is giving the
minimum required, but the Council has the authority to be more restrictive.
In response to the Mayor's question, the City attorney said that in the case of a
church which only warted it for one time it possibly lould be handled in a manner
similar to auctions where.there is an annual fee.
Mr. Richard French said the groups that operate in Fridley don't present a problem to
the City. They run themselves. The problem was clearly pointed out in St. Paul where
they rented the building to other people and let other people run the name. He stated
that he knew of one that runs seven ninhts a week, and that is excessive. Two nights
a week is realistic. They would take in huge sums of money on some nights, and much
would be bled off by the people for non -community or non -charitable purposes.
Mayor Nee inquired about having a first reading and then cleaning it up so as to ret
into the correct legal position.
MOTION by Councilwoman Kukowski to waive the reading and adopt the ordinance on first
reading. Seconded by Councilman Starwalt.
The City Attorney said that if the Council intended to act on the second reading that
the Council will have to give some directions if it wants some additional changes or
some additions to be made.
Mayor Nee replied that there will be sone discussion of this matter next Monday night,
which is riot a regular council meeting night, but all are welcome to attend, mainly
with reference to the licensing fees.
Mr. Richard French said that they operate two nights a week; that it is a lot of work,
and it takes quite a large number of people to run the session if it is to be run
properly; that $12 a session makes it a bit of a problem to get help.
Mr. Richard French said that when you have 600 members and 600 wives and this is
constantly changing, it may present some problems for you. He further stated that in a
group of the size that he represents there is a turnover of people almost on a
constant basis. fie and his organization would like to see it held strictly to the
members or their spouses. No outsiders.
The City Attorney said there is a provision in the statute that would permit people
other than members and their wives, but this might be one area where the Council
could be more restrictive.
Upon'a voice vote, all voting aye, P1ayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.
CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT SUBDIVISION P.S. 176-n3, LEIGH TERRACE, BY
LEIGH INVESTMENTS, INC., GENERALLY LOCATED WEST S_IDF OF INTER�-FCTI N OF OSBORNE—R(AD
AND EAST RIVER ROAD:
The Public'Works Director said this is the final plat, and we had a public hearing on
it on May 10. This is generally located on the west side of the intersection of
Osborne Road and East River Road, and it consists of 11 lots. It should be noted that
if the plat is adopted or approved there are three lots north of Osborne that do not
meet the requirement of 9,000 square feet. The Planning Commission recommended approval
with the minimum number of square feet on the three lots based on the fact that the
St. Paul Water Works owns the property north of these lots and the area will remain
open space and it will be usable by the property owners. The St. Paul Water Works
is the fee owner of the property, and it is in no way included in the proposal. It
was only considered due to the fact that it will remain essentially open space and
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 17, 1976
PAGE 8
to the passers-by it will look like park property. The basic plat was worked out with
the developer and the County and the City in regard to the proposed improvement of
Osborne Road and East River Road. The developer has provided the necessary right-of-way
and one of the stipulations is there should be a ten -foot sidewalk easement along
East River Road, Mr. Doyle is here.
Councilman Fitzpatrick asked if the administration had any other recommendations or
stipulations to make concerning the plat. The Public Works Director said no. The
Public Works Director said that be understands that another stipulation is that the
developer proceed with attaching by covenant the possibility of use of the St. Paul
Water Department property to the developer's property.
The City Attorney replied that he thought that that could not be done. At the best
they would have a written understanding with the St. Paul Water Works that they could
use the property, but that permission could be terminated whenever the St. Paul Water
Works wanted to terminate it.
As a practical matter, the City Attorney said, the situation has been there for 100
years, and that he imagines that the Council could use that as a reason for granting
a variance with the understanding and that if whoever would own the lands wanted to
maintain the area for open space that St. Paul would not terminate the arrangement
unless something very unusual would ;rappen.
Mr. Doyle said that his plan was to put in a temporary, graveled street until the
street improvements could be worked out by the City. As far as he is concerned, he
can see no reason why the traffic cannot go back and exit on Talmadge or 75th Way.
To begin with, the City Administration is going to need some time to fit it in with
the state aid requirements. If they can get it done this year, fine.
The Public Works Director said they are working on that. In the petition there is a
statement that he wants the roadway improved and the assessment placed against the
11 lots. A public hearing would not be required.
Mr..Doyle asked that the name Osborne Road be changed to Osborne Flay.
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to approve final plat subdivision P.S. #76-03, and
grant the necessary variances with the following stipulations:
1. A ten -foot sidewalk easement along East River Road.
2. That the new property owners be notified that the exit of Osborne Way onto
East River Road would be barricaded until the completion of the improvement of
the intersection after which improvement Osborne Way would connect onto East
River Road.
3. The developer pursue the possibility of underground utilities.
Seconded by Councilman Hamernik. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared
the motion carried unanimously.
f RECEIVING THE MINUTES_ OF THE PLANNING COMMISION MEETING OF MAY 5, 1976:
�) CONSIDERATION OF APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES OF APRIL 27,_1976:
A. C. MATTSON, 6270 RIVIEW TERRA
The Public Works Director stated that this is a request for a sideyard variance
from ten feet to six feet, and the matter is before the Council as a result of a
unanimous vote of the Board of Appeals. The petitioner states that because of
an error in lot width it has necessitated this request for the variance. Mr. Mattson
is present.
Mr. Mattson explained•the difficulties in placing his house and garage on the lot.
Primarily it steamed from the lot being almost four feet less in width than he was
led to believe at the time he bought it.
MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to concur with the recommendation of the Board of
Appeals to approve the variance. Seconded by Councilman Hamernik. Upon a voice
vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously.